Vikramaditya Prasad, J. - (1.) THE petitioner was a Constable. According to him, while he was not on active duty, while the wives of other members of the Border Force were coming, the petitioner was alleged to have outraged their modesty. Subsequently, on the compliant of the Commandant, the DIG constituted a Board of Enquiry. The Board of Enquiry submitted a report against the petitioner to the DIG. But it was the Commandant, who, instead of sending the report to the DIG, constituted a Summary Security Force Court. The Summary Security Force Court, after inquiry, passed the impugned order of dismissal of the petitioner and the similarly situated persons were only demoted in rank, but this petitioner was dismissed. Arbitrariness of the respondents is also alleged by the petitioner.
(2.) THE first question is whether it was proper on the part of the Commandant to constitute a Summary Security Force Court in view of the fact that the DIG had already constituted a Board of Enquiry. The report of the Board of Enquiry should have been submitted to the DIG, who had constituted that Committee for action thereon, but in defiance of that, constitution of the Summary Security Force Court by the Commandant is somewhat arbitrary and illegal. Consequently, it is found that against the Summary Security Force Court order (hereinafter referred to as the Court order), there is no appeal because under Section 114, the order of the Summary Security Force Court do not require confirmation, whereas Under Section 117 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968. the appeal lies to the confirming authority against the order of a General Security Force Court. Thus, as the confirmation is not required of the Court order under Section 114, obvious it is that there is no appeal provided in the Act against the order of such Courts. Under Section 113, there is a provision of revision, that too suffers from the same rigour. The revision lies against the Court order, which only requires to be confirmed. Thus, there is neither any provision of appeal, nor of revision against the Court order and the illegality committed by the Commandant is writ large. Therefore, the order of dismissal passed by the Summary Security Force Court, Annexure 4 is hereby quashed. The report of the Board of Enquiry to be considered by the DIG is directed to be considered by the DIG, who will pass a reasoned order, taking into consideration the fact that in respect of similarly situated persons, some order of only demotion has been passed, within a period of one month from the date of receipt/presentation of the copy of this order. A copy of the order passed by the DIG will be made available to the petitioner and the petitioner may have legal recourse thereafter. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, this writ petition is disposed of.;